Legal Opinion
Hecht v. Barnhart
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided August 26, 2002No. 00 CV 3996(JM)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum of Decision and Order
SPATT, District Judge.
On May 12, 2000, the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) determined that Daniel Hecht was eligible for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments. The SSA reduced his monthly benefits, however, because he received monthly disbursements from his Supplemental Needs Trust to pay his room and board. Plaintiff moves for a remand pursuant to the sixth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) cross-moves for a judgment affirming the decision, arguing that the Commissioner properly determined the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Christensen v. Harris CountySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Elmer G. Berry v. Richard Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- Patrick Balsamo v. Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of Social SecurityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hobbs Ex Rel. Hobbs v. ZendermanDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2008
- Calef Ex Rel. Calef v. BarnhartDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2004
- Assistant Deputy Wardens/Deputy Wardens v. The City of New YorkDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2019